FB: Empire 8

[jknezek]

Wally this board and others don't really care that UMU doesn't get shipped East. What they want, and have a hard time articulating, is for a team in the East to get a 1. That actually means keeping the West or North from getting two 1 seeds, not keeping UMU from getting shipped East, but since UMU is typically closest to the East they draw the unfounded irritation...

[AUPepBand]

Wally this board and others don't really care that UMU doesn't get shipped East. What they want, and have a hard time articulating, is for a team in the East to get a 1. That actually means keeping the West or North from getting two 1 seeds, not keeping UMU from getting shipped East, but since UMU is typically closest to the East they draw the unfounded irritation...

Well stated....+K...and when Wesley steps into the NJAC next year, they'll move from the South Region to the East Region, right?

Once they're in the East Region, Pep sees Wesley probably getting a 1 seed before Fisher, but we'll just wait and see.

On Saxon Warriors!

[sjfcards]

Wally this board and others don't really care that UMU doesn't get shipped East. What they want, and have a hard time articulating, is for a team in the East to get a 1. That actually means keeping the West or North from getting two 1 seeds, not keeping UMU from getting shipped East, but since UMU is typically closest to the East they draw the unfounded irritation...

That is it exactly. I don't care which team gets "shipped in" (although it always seems to be UMU). We have had this discussion over and over, but the East has not seemed to have that 1 team that is able to go undefeated, so some team gets a 1 seed over all of the East teams.

Sometimes I wonder if a 0 in the loss column would really make a difference for a 1 seed in the East. If Rowan or Cortland went undefeated in the NJAC would that qualify them as a 1 seed over an undefeated UMU? It would depend on the other teams in the North I guess, but it is an interesting debate. Hobart did go undefeated the last two years and has not been a 1 seed, so the LL does not cut it.

Even in the E8, a conference ranked 2nd in the nation by Pat and the boys in kickoff, is probably not above the stigma of the East. If IC had beat Hartwick and Cortland last year, would they have been a 1 seed with their schedule?

A lot of us on this board point to Fisher as a team that can get a 1, but if Otterbein goes 5-5 this year in the OAC, and the rest of the E8 beats each other so each team ends with 2 or 3 losses, is that enough for a 1 seed? I don't know if it is.

That is what is frustrating to me. It seems like even if an East team really is that good (and I am not sure there is an East team that is) it may not be enough, simply because they play in the East. I am not complaining about it, as I am not convinced any team could beat 1 seeds from other regions, I just think it is the way it is going to be until someone from the East (hopefully Fisher) can beat a UMU, UWW, or a UMHB and get to a Stagg Bowl. If that happens it will probably be as a 2 seed for all of the reasons listed above, and if a team can do that, and follow that up with an undefeated season, then they could get a 1 seed. That is a lot to ask of any program from any region. 

[jknezek]

One of the things we have to recognize is that the 1 seeds rarely change. In a year where UMU, UWW, UMHB, Linfield, and the MIAC champ are undefeated you have five teams that tend to boast as good or better resumes than anyone in the East. As good as SJF has been in two of the last four years, they don't have a win over one of these teams and they have a pair of, on paper, lopsided losses to them. You can play the "what if" game all you want with UMHB last year, but it was a 3 score game at the end. In the other two years SJF didn't even qualify for the playoffs.

I know every season stands alone in a perfect world, but that's not how it works. Reputations are earned and those 1 seeds are really, really hard to earn. Geography alone isn't going to do it anymore. Sustained excellence, and not just against your conference or even a second tier OOC win, is needed. SJF is still struggling to be consistent in conference. There isn't that signature win that says "we deserve more."

To be a 1 seed is to be a legitimate national title contender. When you look around, can you honestly say that SJF is in that conversation at the end of any of the last 4,5,6 regular seasons? I can't and I doubt anyone but a rabid SJF fan could with a straight face.  Too many mistakes, too many inexplicable losses, and just not on the same physical level as the elite tier.

Hobart, despite going undefeated, is not a national title contender. Neither is JHU although they deserved better than the Wesley match up last year. Or Wittenberg. In any given year there are more than 4 undefeated teams so just going undefeated doesn't make you a national title contender. Sooner or later SJF is going to have to make the playoffs several years in a row and get that breakthrough win. Once that happens the hand wringing and irritation becomes much more legit. Until then? Keep improving...

[Bombers798891]

I firmly believe that an unbeaten Fisher in '07 and an unbeaten IC or in 2008 get a #1 seed. Fisher is self-explanatory, IMO. They'd be coming off of their semi appearance and battle with Mount, and IC gave Mount a good run for their money in 2007.

Yeah, they didn't beat Mount, but in 2006, Fisher gave them as good a game as anyone except Capital. In 2008, Ithaca and Whitewater were the only two teams to not get obliterated by Mount.

[boobyhasgameyo]

Agreed on a lot of what you are saying jknezek, except Fisher is on the same physical level as the elite tier.  Speed kills and we don't have the same speed as UMHB and the Mount Union teams of old that we faced from 2006-2009. 

Also, while Fisher is struggling to remain as consistent as the other top dogs, it's not as though on their off years they are finishing with a below .500 record.  The E8 is tough to go through without losing.  It's only happened 3 times in the last decade.  Once by Salisbury, once by Alfred and once by Ithaca.  So if a team like Fisher can go to the final 4 (after beating another E8 team in the elite 8, which means the E8 was 4-0 up to that round) and still not finish with a perfect record in their conference that year...maybe that speaks to how difficult the conference truly is.  We may not have the juggernaut at the top but it is a dog fight almost every week.  Hell, even UWW lost to Buffalo State in 2012.  Sure that was a down year for them (with the same record Fisher posts in their down years of 7-3 or 8-3), but they still finished the year 5-2 in the highly praised WIAC yet 0-1 against the E8.  Buffalo State finished that year 4-3 in the E8 by the way, so they had a tougher time in their conference comparably the year they beat Whitewater.     

*Actually in 2006 Fisher met up with Springfield in the 2nd round, not the 3rd.  So the E8 went 4-1 against non E8 teams in the playoffs that year, not 5-1. 

[jknezek]

  Speed kills and we don't have the same speed as UMHB and the Mount Union teams of old that we faced from 2006-2009. 

I consider speed a physical attribute

Also, while Fisher is struggling to remain as consistent as the other top dogs, it's not as though on their off years they are finishing with a below .500 record.  The E8 is tough to go through without losing.  It's only happened 3 times in the last decade.  Once by Salisbury, once by Alfred and once by Ithaca.

Neither is the WIAC, the ASC, or even the OAC. The elite teams manage it year in and out. Not just go undefeated but make the playoffs. SJF doesn't make the playoffs 50% of the last six years. The elite teams are at least 5 of 6. The one exception being the MIAC champion. 2 St. Johns, 3 St. Thomas and 1 Bethel. Granted in years one and two the MIAC champion went 1 or 2 games deep, since then they've always gone at least 3.

So if a team like Fisher can go to the final 4 (after beating another E8 team in the elite 8, which means the E8 was 4-0 up to that round) and still not finish with a perfect record in their conference that year...maybe that speaks to how difficult the conference truly is.

The conference is difficult. So are others. But SJF made the final four one time eight years ago with the closest to an elite team being Rowan at the tail end of their run. They played UMU close, so that is definitely the data point to hold on to, unfortunately it is aged at the moment. And SJF did not sustain anywhere near that kind of success. So in statistical terms we call that an outlier.

We may not have the juggernaut at the top but it is a dog fight almost every week.  Hell, even UWW lost to Buffalo State in 2012.  Sure that was a down year for them (with the same record Fisher posts in their down years of 7-3 or 8-3), but they still finished the year 5-2 in the highly praised WIAC yet 0-1 against the E8.  Buffalo State finished that year 4-3 in the E8 by the way, so they had a tougher time in their conference comparably the year they beat Whitewater.     

Sadly that's also the year the E8 champion got buried in round 1 by Widener. Widener was then obliterated by UMU in round 2. Who won a single game in a single instance over a single season in the past is often a poor way to create an argument for sustained strength.

[Saxon73]

Salisbury lost to Widener in the 2nd round.

They beat Rowan in the 1st round 17-9

[sjfcards]

One of the things we have to recognize is that the 1 seeds rarely change. In a year where UMU, UWW, UMHB, Linfield, and the MIAC champ are undefeated you have five teams that tend to boast as good or better resumes than anyone in the East. As good as SJF has been in two of the last four years, they don't have a win over one of these teams and they have a pair of, on paper, lopsided losses to them. You can play the "what if" game all you want with UMHB last year, but it was a 3 score game at the end. In the other two years SJF didn't even qualify for the playoffs.

I know every season stands alone in a perfect world, but that's not how it works. Reputations are earned and those 1 seeds are really, really hard to earn. Geography alone isn't going to do it anymore. Sustained excellence, and not just against your conference or even a second tier OOC win, is needed. SJF is still struggling to be consistent in conference. There isn't that signature win that says "we deserve more."

To be a 1 seed is to be a legitimate national title contender. When you look around, can you honestly say that SJF is in that conversation at the end of any of the last 4,5,6 regular seasons? I can't and I doubt anyone but a rabid SJF fan could with a straight face.  Too many mistakes, too many inexplicable losses, and just not on the same physical level as the elite tier.

Hobart, despite going undefeated, is not a national title contender. Neither is JHU although they deserved better than the Wesley match up last year. Or Wittenberg. In any given year there are more than 4 undefeated teams so just going undefeated doesn't make you a national title contender. Sooner or later SJF is going to have to make the playoffs several years in a row and get that breakthrough win. Once that happens the hand wringing and irritation becomes much more legit. Until then? Keep improving...

Just to be clear, I was not trying to make the point that an undefeated Fisher deserves a 1 seed. What I was trying to convey in my post was that it seems no matter what a team does in the East, they will probably not get a one seed just because they are in the East. I am not arguing that that is right or wrong, but pointing out that keeping a team out of a top seed simply because the East has historically been a sub par region hardly seems like a reasonable way to pick the top seeds.

[jknezek]

A team from the east is probably going to have to earn a 1 seed in the tournament. Not going to get one just by being undefeated unless there are a few bad seasons at the same time among the elites. Of course scheduling and beating an elite regular season while going undefeated would probably do it too.  It might just boil down to getting a signature win

[jknezek]

Salisbury lost to Widener in the 2nd round.

They beat Rowan in the 1st round 17-9

My bad.  +k for the correction

[boobyhasgameyo]

An outlier for the conference advancing in the playoffs?  Because in 2011 was when Fisher took one of the crappiest teams it ever made the playoffs with and still managed to get into the elite 8, and it didn't just beat two east teams to get there.  The same year Salisbury also made it to the elite 8.  So a quarter of the final 8 teams were E8 based.  The conference probably has one of the best playoff winning percentages excluding what UMU and UWW do for their conferences - they are the statistical outliers for their own conferences in how they drive up the %'s greatly in comparison to the rest of them.  OAC had a run where their second place teams were awesome, no denying that.  But you can't talk about recent history and then dismiss what their 2nd place teams have done or not done in the playoffs the last 8 years or so.  Including having John Carroll get knocked out by Fisher last year. 

Ultimately both E8 teams lost in games that weren't close in the elite 8 in 2011.  But again, I already stated we are a conference that lacks the truly elite team.  But if you aren't one of the top 4 teams in the country - good luck making it through the E8 untouched year in and year out.  I think you'd be arrogant and foolish to think otherwise.

Also, that Fisher team was crappy to watch the entire season and still managed to make noise in the playoffs as they often do.  That's a credit to me.  Sure St. Thomas blew them out, but that was nothing special to St. Thomas.  Salisbury blew out fisher that year and Hobart beat them by the same margin as St. Thomas as well, and they didn't need to run trick plays and pile on the score in the last minutes of the game to do so. 

St. Thomas faced UWW the next round and lost by 20.  The same exact margin that Salisbury, our E8 team, lost the round before.  So they didn't exactly fare any better.     

[jknezek]

Ultimately both E8 teams lost in games that weren't close in the elite 8 in 2011.  But again, I already stated we are a conference that lacks the truly elite team.  But if you aren't one of the top 4 teams in the country - good luck making it through the E8 untouched year in and year out. I think you'd be arrogant and foolish to think otherwise.

I don't dispute this. But this is also proof of why an E8 champion hasn't gotten a 1 seed since we moved away from regional brackets and why simply being an E8 champion, undefeated or not, most likely will not get you a 1 seed on its own. To be a 1 seed you have to be elite. One of the expected top 4 teams in D3. The top 1.5% of schools in D3. How can you expect to be considered that 1 seed if you can't and haven't beaten the teams that are the competitors for the 1 seed? You simply cannot. Which brings the discussion full circle. When SJF or whoever gets a 1 seed coming from the East it will most likely be because they have proven they can beat an elite team. Not just that they are the top team in a region primarily designed to balance the number of teams throughout the country.

When do I think SJF will get a 1 seed? I think it will happen during a two year run where they win the E8, advance to the final four by beating one of the elite 6 or 7 teams, and then run the table the next year. If it doesn't happen at that point, then I will fully get behind the East region griping. Until you get an undefeated champion with an elite win the current or previous year, all you have is belief and no proof that the teams can win at the level required to be considered a top 4 team in the country.

[fisheralum91]

IMHO- Fisher goes 10-0

#1 seed....

[MasterJedi]

IMHO- Fisher goes 10-0

#1 seed....

Lookingat  it objectively the only way that happens is if only three of the elite teams goes undefeated. So only three of UWW, UMU, UMHB, Linfield, Wesley and NCC can go 10-0 for that to happen. Realistically if Fisher goes 10-0 and all those teams are undefeated they will probably get a #2 seed. Especially since the brackets haven't really been regionally based in awhile.